Tuesday, November 29, 2016

The NDAA Legalizes the Use of Propaganda on United States Citizens - Commentary and Links, Plus an Interview with Dr. Udo Ulfkotte

In recent news, the claim that "fake news" is a problem in America has raised more than a few concerns among free-thinking citizens. These claims that this "problem of fake news" needs to be solved seem to hint at a desire to enforce control over what information citizens have access to. There have been many similar assertions coming from the White House and corporate entities such as Facebook and Reddit, claiming that some danger exists within simple information.

For the longest time, various official sources have acted as though American citizens are so intellectually incompetent that they cannot make their own choices responsibly. These officials commonly attempt to assume the role of babysitter, and then limit our access to information. This stance has existed for quite a while among elitist regimes, and it was just as unethical and hypocritical in Nazi Germany as it is in modern-day America.

Those who attempt to stifle information never typically do so for the good of those they claim to be helping. They do it for themselves, and this is not just conjecture. This has been proven by the very unethical laws of the very people who currently claim to care about truth in media.

Barak Obama has been president since January, 2009. Yet, never once in his entire term did he even care to ensure truth in media was ever respected by the very government he was supposedly guiding. To my knowledge, neither Obama, Zuckerberg, nor anyone related to the recent "fake news" issue has ever once complained about the fact that the American government is in the business of fake news. Never once did they speak up for the sake of accuracy in reporting.

Time after time over the past decade, the American people have been lied to about issue after issue by officials who seemed to be intent upon pushing their own agenda. These people seemed to care absolutely nothing about freedom of the press, and instead of allowing information to freely circulate, these people replaced the press with an army of propagandists bent upon obeying the will of their official handlers. To add an example to this point, let's consider the passing the Nation Defense Authorization Act.

The passing of such an unethical bill as the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) was not only a disgrace to America, it was a wake-up call for all of us to stop swallowing every piece of information we are handed without question. This act included numerous questionable changes to American law and introduced a the potential compromise of free and reliable information.

To cover the basics, the NDAA included an amendment that legalized the distribution of propaganda within United States borders. The original act that the NDAA affected is called the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948 which was a post-WWII law passed to ensure that Americans would not be affected by propaganda designed for foreign audiences.

The slight change of the territory to which propaganda is distributed may seem benign. However, those who know the way in which American government operates know that 70-year-old laws are not typically altered without some hidden catch included. We may consider how thoroughly American media has been polluted by corporate interests and political agendas and realize that much of the information and entertainment we see from corporate sources is in no way objective.

We have sensed that among all political
and corporate messages, that somehow, we are not receiving the entire
story in an unbiased presentation. In light of this, it becomes
evident that the recent efforts to curb “fake news” are not in
the best interests of the right of the general public to free and
untainted information.

If Obama, Zuckerburg, or anyone else singing the song of "fake news" cared anything about the issue, the fact would be obvious. Instead, when we see the complete lack of action against the promotion of blatant disinformation from official sources, the truth becomes clear. The American government has been in the business of fake news for decades. However, thanks to NDAA, we have legal and documented proof of the fact. We will discuss the details in a moment. Right now, here is Business Insider.

The amendment — proposed by Mac Thornberry (R-Texas) and Adam Smith (D-Wash.) and passed in the House last Friday afternoon — would effectively nullify the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948, which explicitly forbids information and psychological operations aimed at influencing U.S. public opinion.

Thornberry said that the current law “ties the hands of America’s diplomatic officials, military, and others by inhibiting our ability to effectively communicate in a credible way,” according to Buzzfeed.

The vote came two days after a federal judged ruled that an indefinite detention provision in the annual defense bill was unconstitutional.

IO are primarily used to target foreign audiences, but Davis cites numerous senior leaders who want to (in the words of Colonel Richard B. Leap) "protect a key friendly center of gravity, to wit US national will" by repealing the Smith-Mundt Act to allow the direct deployment of these tactics on the American public.

Davis quotes Brigadier General Ralph O. Baker — the Pentagon officer responsible for the Department of Defense’s Joint Force Development (i.e. Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines) — who defines IO as activities undertaken to "shape the essential narrative of a conflict or situation and thus affect the attitudes and behaviors of the targeted audience" and equates descriptions of combat operations with standard marketing strategies:

For years, commercial advertisers have based their advertisement strategies on the premise that there is a positive correlation between the number of times a consumer is exposed to product advertisement and that consumer’s inclination to sample the new product. The very same principle applies to how we influence our target audiences when we conduct COIN.

Those who have looked at the finer details of the legalization of propaganda may be confused as to where such legalization may apply. We may have also heard skeptics claim that there is no direct legalization of propaganda on U.S. citizens. However, this is only confusing to those who have not closely observed how the American court system functions.

Simply put, the concept is known as a legal loophole. In most courts of law in the U.S., judges tend to weigh a case on the finer technical details of the situation. In any fair case, the judgement will be determined by the perceived intent to harm an individual, the individual's property, etc. One of the factors that is taken into account is whether or not the legality of the defendant's acts could be considered benign in any location within the jurisdiction of the court. In other words, if the actions in question are ever deemed as legal in any place where the court holds authority, there is a good chance that the actions could be deemed legal in every case. This is how the loophole applies.

The fact is that the passing of Nation Defense Authorization Act created a loophole which made propaganda legal within the territory of the United States. This legalization acts as a foot in the door for other cases on all American soil. When we factor in the fact that multiple corporations and banking interests would give anything to lie for their own benefit, plus the rampant corruption that these entities commonly cover up, the likelihood that these government entities, banks and corporations would take advantage of this free pass is astronomically high.

Considering the number of cases of blatant corruption and constitutional violation, combined with the excessive apathy of the American people on these matters, I would say that the chances are high that we have been pacified for the benefit of elitist interests. In light of these revelations, it becomes very necessary for each of us to ensure that we learn of every way in which corporate media has taken advantage of the free pass of propaganda in the U.S. Only afterward can we begin to learn exactly what the truth of any situation might be.

* * * * *

Dr. Udo Ulfkotte Confesses to Being One of Many Former Propagandist who Worked for CIA Interests

I started DTM because I
feel that informing the people is the most positive and impactful
thing I am able to do at this point. I work at my articles as though
each one were my job, as I don't quite have the health to keep an
actual job right now. Somehow, I get more energized when I know I'm
having a positive impact in the lives of others.

Right now, I rely
upon donations and ads to keep my site going. Ideally, we would live
in a world free of the need for money of any kind. We will have that
world very soon, I believe, but in the mean time, I depend upon this
task to sustain me as I do my best to be dependable to you, my
readers. I hope “Discerning the Mystery” is a truly positive and
progressive experience for you.